Just as growing stubble on the face of Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., marks America’s yearly descent into the long winter months, the introduction of the Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act marks the coming of spring.
Every session since the 110th, at least one member introduces the PUPS Act to Congress.
This year — as in 2011, 2010 and 2008 — the honor of trying to protect puppies has fallen to Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill. The language of the bill has not changed in three sessions. It is co-sponsored by members of both parties in both chambers. Further, according to a release from Durbin and the bill’s co-sponsor, Sen. David Vitter, R-La., the bill would amend the Animal Welfare Act to protect puppies by requiring “all breeders that sell more than 50 dogs a year to be licensed and to undergo inspections to ensure dogs are receiving proper care.”
Unfortunately, a quick glance at the life of this legislation reveals that the PUPS bill enters both the Senate and House Agriculture committees, is euthanized quickly and is not heard from until the next session.
HOH has learned that the American Kennel Club is opposed to the bill as it is written because it may have some “unintended consequences.” Indeed, several of the bill’s co-sponsors have admitted that they can’t actually support the legislation if it were to come to the floor.